Dave Page wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>> Until someone devises the 'perfect solution to spam', I would think
>> that a series of 'less then perfect ones' would at least help combat
>> it ...
>
> And that's a perfectly fine idea, except when one of those partial
> solutions can have undesirable side effects. In the case of SPF we've
> heard of at least two so far:
>
> 1) When used without ?all, those scoring messages using SPF may end
> up blocking legitimate messages from non-listed servers.
>
> 2) SPF may be used as a mechanism for DNS attacks.
>
> Regards, Dave.
Just to add some more to the debate:
http://david.woodhou.se/why-not-spf.html
http://www.circleid.com/posts/spf_loses_mindshare/
And others.
I respect Suresh a LOT from the anti-spam community,
and I've REMOVED my SPF records. I don't think we (PostgreSQL.org)
should put an SPF record in place.
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893